Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by Forgeties79 35 days ago
> until we collectively redefine and enforce a value system that benefits us all

Tons of us called for common sense guard rails and a little bit of actual intention as we rolled out LLM’s, but we were all shouted down as “luddites” who were “obstructing progress.”

We all knew this was coming. It’s been incredibly frustrating knowing how preventable so much of it has been and will continue to be.

Edit: these responses are absurd. Banning GPU’s…? What are you on about? Who said anything about stopping or banning LLM’s? Did none of you see “guardrails”? “A little bit of actual intention”? Where are you getting these extreme interpretations?

I’m talking basic regulatory framework stuff. Regulations around disclosure, usage, access, etc. you know, all the stuff we neglected and are now paying for with social media in droves? We have done this song and dance so many times. No one is going to take away your precious robot helper, we’re just saying “maybe we should think about this for more than two seconds and not be completely blinded by dollar signs.” I mean people have literally died in my state because Zuckerberg wants to save a few bucks building his data center.

It feels like AI evangelists come out the woodwork seething if anybody even implies you shouldn’t be allowed to do literally whatever you want at all times.

3 comments

Sigh, and what guardrails are common sense? Are those the same level of common sense as those advocated for guns ( and narrowed down at every possible opportunity )? Some of us see this tech as possibly revolutionary and thanks to useful individuals calling for muzzling that tech we now have the worst of both worlds: centrally controlled, not really open ( weights are just weights -- though Meta actually deserves some credit here ), and heavily muzzled.

Clearly, powers that be learned all too well from internet rollout.

>sigh,

I stopped reading. No point in engaging this if that’s how you’re kicking things off.

"Sigh" is indeed a thought-terminating cliche. So is "Common sense."
“Sigh” is “I don’t respect you and will now talk down to you.”

“Common sense” at least invites the question, “what do you consider common sense solutions?” and if I were to balk at that then clearly I’m not discussing the topic in good faith.

But it's just argument bait, isn't it? What are the odds that the guardrails you consider common sense will agree with my own?

It's like how 90% of people might be in favor of "common sense gun control," but when you drill down and propose specific gun-control measures, you find that it didn't help a bit to start the conversation by invoking "common sense." We're seeing the same with AI.

It’s not “argument bait.” I’m making a point and people can discuss it with me or not.
Except that it's not preventable. Technology is always an arms race. If you don't create it, someone else will, and then they'll have the advantage and subjugate you, so you might as well be the one to do it first. Whatever it is that you're trying to prevent, someone is going to do it if it gives them power.
What’s not preventable? What do you think I am saying, exactly?
It wasn't "preventable" though. How would you prevent what's been happening ? Pass a law making GPUs illegal ? Just ..."convince" everyone that the machine that can write working software, business letters and render good enough banner and print advertising for nearly free is evil and just don't use it (ask Emily Bender how that's going)? There is no realistic way from stopping any of this from happening. Need a different approach.
I proposed literally none of those solutions or even suggested them.
<< common sense guard rails and a little bit of actual intention

The issue is that you seem to be proposing nothing but platitudes and when called on it, did not elaborate but high tailed to the cloak of misunderstood defender of sense and sensibility.

It’s not simply platitudes. People use the phrase constantly in this context: https://www.aft.org/sites/default/files/media/documents/2024...
I read it and even with charitable read on the biggest guardrail appears to be putting a bunch of committees in the process to control the process one way or another. At its core, it is a wishlist for education workers and I am not completely against that, but lets call it what it actually is. Beyond that.. I have not seen an actual proposal.. common sense or otherwise. And that is before we get 'being eco friendly' ( how is that guardrail for AI? ), advancing democracy ( again, not sure how it is a guardrail ) or advancing equity and fairness ( same question ).

The closest thing I saw to an actual guardrail was humans.. which, is not wrong at its core, but again lacks specificity.